How Learning Actually Works According to Science
Re-reading and highlighting feel productive but are weak learning methods. Retrieval practice, spacing, and interleaving create durable understanding.
What was corrected
Article attributed an unverified one-day-versus-one-month score reversal (89pct/72pct flipping to 38pct/61pct) to Rohrer in Psychological Science, and attributed an unverified 52 percent improvement figure and Khan Academy mastery-learning framing to the real Roschelle et al. 2016 study.
Rohrer's interleaving finding corrected to the real, replicated result (72 percent versus 38 percent on a two-week delayed test, published in Psychonomic Bulletin and Review and Journal of Educational Psychology); the Roschelle et al. citation corrected to accurately describe the real ASSISTments randomized trial and its real effect size of 0.18 standard deviations.
Why this is better
Verified both named studies against their real published versions; found a real researcher's work altered with an unverified narrative in one case, and a real study's subject, platform, and effect size all misrepresented in the other.